The FBI and other agencies always use either paedophiles or terrorists as the justification for having mass surveillance and snooping powers. Now they might have caught one using those powers, they are dropping the case against him because they would be forced to reveal the details of the exploit they used, and this exploit would inevitably end up being fixed to prevent further snooping. Which begs the question, why do they need these powers if they aren't going to use them against the people they said they needed it for?

Federal prosecutor Annette Hayes wrote in a court filing on Friday that "because the government remains unwilling to disclose certain discovery related to the FBI's deployment of a 'network investigative technique'" it was "deprived of the evidence needed to establish defendant Jay Michaud's guilt beyond reasonable doubt".The government's Motion to Dismiss order is pending before the court and the judge is expected to sign a dismissal order "within the next day or two", the assistant public defender Colin Fieman told the BBC.

Mr Michaud's case is one of many emerging from the investigation into Playpen users.In December, the Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell said the investigation of Playpen led to more than 200 active prosecutions and the identification or rescue of at least 49 American children who were subject to sexual abuse.

In January, Michael Fluckiger was sentenced to 20 years in jail for running the Playpen site.Once the site's administrators had been arrested, the FBI kept the site going for 13 days to gather information about members.

How odd & absurd ...with all of the international 'Porn/Child Pornography/Sex Trafficking' cases that have been adjudicated all these years since the WWW and wire tapping/internet hacking this one trial for the British judicial system doesn't pass the legal requirements because the FBI won't explain their methods? Anyone have the information regarding this issue - is this a new ruling - changes in your court system?

The FBI and other agencies always use either paedophiles or terrorists as the justification for having mass surveillance and snooping powers. Now they might have caught one using those powers, they are dropping the case against him because they would be forced to reveal the details of the exploit they used, and this exploit would inevitably end up being fixed to prevent further snooping. Which begs the question, why do they need these powers if they aren't going to use them against the people they said they needed it for?

TOR was made by the US IS to ensure that there was a secure network for agents to use but it growed. It has always been insecure as hell.